- Thread starter
- #1
Welcome to our community
Be apart of something great, join today!
Hank Aarons Rookie went for $100,000 - How about Pujols?
- Thread starter hofautos
- Start date
Disclaimer: Links on this page pointing to Amazon, eBay and other sites may include affiliate code. If you click them and make a purchase, we may earn a small commission.
AndruwHRJones
New member
- Aug 9, 2008
- 1,187
- 0
Skorris CCBC said:
Come on now, the card is only for the serious collector. You can't see a serious collector spending that kind of money on Pujols?
Bill Menard
New member
- Aug 26, 2008
- 3,421
- 0
:lol: :lol: :lol:AndruwHRJones said:
Nate Colbert 17
Active member
It looke like he has three listings for the card.
One listing is at $200.00, while the other two are at $15,000.00.
One listing is at $200.00, while the other two are at $15,000.00.
- Thread starter
- #6
- Thread starter
- #7
BunchOBull
Active member
Technically, it's only for the serious "collectible," according the the seller.
uniquebaseballcards
New member
- Nov 12, 2008
- 6,783
- 0
Today's modern cards in general are just different than vintage cards in what they mean to a collector.
The '54 Aaron was owned by hundreds of thousands of people at some point whereas maybe 1,000 people have ever owned a Pujols '01 BC RC. While I'm not saying the card is a bad or good investment, its just that the Pujols feels more like it was produced to be an investment rather than a collectible because of its limited print run.
I also don't think '01 BC as a **set** will ever approach the collectibility of '54 Topps, partially because of '01 BC's limited print run, and partially because there are failed prospects in '01 BC that never panned out that nobody is really interested in anymore. As we know popular sets can really drive the prices of individual cards in that set, IMO '54 Topps will always be more popular.
Its just hard to get all nostaligic and pay for a set or card you never owned or have never seen in person before even if you like the player, especially if the set was pretty much created to be an investment more than a collectible.
So even if Aaron and Pujols wound up with identical career stats, it would make sense to me that the Aaron would always be more sought after by collectors.
The '54 Aaron was owned by hundreds of thousands of people at some point whereas maybe 1,000 people have ever owned a Pujols '01 BC RC. While I'm not saying the card is a bad or good investment, its just that the Pujols feels more like it was produced to be an investment rather than a collectible because of its limited print run.
I also don't think '01 BC as a **set** will ever approach the collectibility of '54 Topps, partially because of '01 BC's limited print run, and partially because there are failed prospects in '01 BC that never panned out that nobody is really interested in anymore. As we know popular sets can really drive the prices of individual cards in that set, IMO '54 Topps will always be more popular.
Its just hard to get all nostaligic and pay for a set or card you never owned or have never seen in person before even if you like the player, especially if the set was pretty much created to be an investment more than a collectible.
So even if Aaron and Pujols wound up with identical career stats, it would make sense to me that the Aaron would always be more sought after by collectors.
AndruwHRJones said:
darrend505
New member
- Aug 9, 2008
- 9,478
- 0
uniquebaseballcards said:
+1 Great post!
- Thread starter
- #12
- Thread starter
- #13
Austin
Well-known member
Most collectors don't know the 1954 Johnston Cookies Hank Aaron rookie exists.hofautos said:
It's a cool card.
- Thread starter
- #15
Austin
Well-known member
Oh, I know. I was replying with a picture of the Johnston Cookies card so other collectors who had not heard of it could see it. (it's not my card).hofautos said:
